PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.SurgerySubject: search.filters.subject.Gender Gap

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Research Gap in Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery: Gender-specific Disparities in Submission of Abstracts to the German Congress of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery from 2015 to 2024 Open PDF 
    (Georg Thieme Verlag KG, 2025-04-30)
    Vogel, Carolina
    ;
    Bertsch, Vera
    ;
    Rollmann, Mika F.
    ;
    Histing, Tina
    ;
    Braun, Benedikt J.
    Gender-specific differences also affect the subject of orthopaedics and trauma surgery (O&T). While the proportion of women studying medicine is steadily increasing, the proportion of female surgeons in O&T is only 18.6%. This underrepresentation affects not only clinics but also research and is reflected in participation in scientific annual meetings such as the German Congress for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery (DKOU).This retrospective study examined the gender differences in abstract submissions to the DKOU from 2015 to 2024. The anonymised data were subjected to examination regarding gender, role in submission and academic title.The overall participation of women in the 82,813 abstracts was 20%. The proportion of women among submitters was 23.3%, among presenters 24.5% and among co-authors 18.2%. In the analysis of the female cohort alone, women were more likely to be submitters and presenters than in the male cohort (p < 0.001). The proportion of female participation in abstract submissions increased by an average of 0.5% per year over the study period. However, women were significantly underrepresented at higher academic degrees, such as habilitations (7.4%), professorships (7.6%) and university professorships (5.2%).The results show that the proportion of women submitting abstracts to the DKOU largely corresponds to the percentage in the field of orthopaedics and trauma surgery (18.6% in 2022), reflecting the overall gender disparity in this specialty. If this trend analysis were applied to the general development of gender parity in orthopaedics and trauma surgery, gender-equitable staffing of medical positions could not be achieved before the year 2087. To accelerate this development, targeted measures to promote women in orthopaedics and trauma surgery are necessary. This includes dismantling structural barriers and implementing specific support programs for female surgeons pursuing academic careers.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Gap in Scientific Publications on COVID-19 in Italy During the First Wave of the Pandemic: An Observational Study Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Mazzalai, Elena
    ;
    Turatto, Federica
    ;
    De Vito, Corrado
    Background: Worldwide, concerns rise on how COVID-19 pandemic impacted heavily on women, even on those belonging to the scientific community. The Italian scientific production regarding the COVID-19 throughout the first months of the health emergency could help to understand the heft of female researchers in this unique period. Objectives: This study aims to investigate the gender gap in the scientific production on COVID-19 in Italy during the first months of the pandemic. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted and, for each included study, first and last author's gender, type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation, journal's Impact Factor (IF) and specialization were extracted. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed. Results: 22.2% of the articles were signed by a woman as first author, 18.1% as last authors. Female authorship was less frequent than male authorship regardless of the type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation and field of specialization. Conclusion: This analysis reveal a low prevalence of studies with a female first or last author and suggests that the low share of female authors publishing on COVID-19 during the considered timespan is a transversal issue throughout the Italian medical field.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does academic authorship reflect gender bias in pediatric surgery? An analysis of the Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2007–2017 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Marrone, Alexandra F.
    ;
    Berman, Loren
    ;
    Brandt, Mary L.
    ;
    Rothstein, David H.
    Background Gender representation in academic publications has been considered a surrogate for gender equity in medicine, although this concept has not been evaluated in pediatric surgery. Methods First and last author genders for Journal of Pediatric Surgery articles from United States and/or Canadian institutions (2007, 2012, 2017) were identified. These data were compared to gender proportions for applicants to and matriculants in pediatric surgery fellowships as well as among American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) members. Results Authorship gender was identified for 632/640 primary articles (98.8%). From 2007 to 2017, the proportion of women as first authors increased from 33.0% to 53.9% (p < 0.001) and as last authors from 16.2% to 26.4% (p = 0.01). The proportion of women fellowship applicants rose from 35.9% to 57.6% (p < 0.001); among those who successfully matched the rise was nonlinear (20.5%–34.0%, p = 0.16). APSA junior and senior women membership proportions rose during the study period [from 28.1% to 43.4% (p = 0.06 for linear trend) and 17.9% to 24.4% (p = 0.005 for linear trend), respectively]. Conclusions Over the past decade, the overall proportion of women authors in a leading academic pediatric surgery journal has increased significantly, although representation among last authors remains disproportionately low. The numbers of women applicants to pediatric surgery fellowship increased but there was not a concordant rise in the number of women accepted into training positions. Type of study Bibliometric analysis. Level of evidence n/a
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women’s role in neurosurgical research: is the gender gap improving? Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Pastor-Cabeza, M.
    ;
    Torné, R.
    ;
    García-Armengol, R.
    ;
    Menéndez-Osorio, B.
    ;
    Mosteiro-Cadaval, A.
    Objective The percentage of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research might be perceived as a representation of our specialty and may influence the perpetuation of the existing gender gap. This study investigated whether the trend in women taking lead roles in neurosurgical research has mirrored the increase in female neurosurgeons during the past decade and whether our most prestigious publications portray enough female role models to stimulate gender diversity among the new generation of neurosurgeons. Methods Two of the most prominent neurosurgical journals—Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery—were selected for this study, and every original article that was published in 2009 and 2019 in each of those journals was investigated according to the gender of the first and senior authors, their academic titles, their affiliations, and their institutions’ region. Results A total of 1328 articles were analyzed. The percentage of female authors was significantly higher in Europe and Russia compared with the US and Canada (first authors: 60/302 [19.9%] vs 109/829 [13.1%], p = 0.005; and senior authors: 32/302 [10.6%] vs 57/829 [6.9%], p = 0.040). Significantly increased female authorship was observed from 2009 to 2019, and overall numbers of both first and senior female authors almost doubled. However, when analyzing by regions, female authorship increased significantly only in the US and Canada. Female authors of neurosurgical research articles were significantly less likely to hold an MD degree compared with men. Female neurosurgeons serving as senior authors were represented in only 3.6% (48/1328) of articles. Women serving as senior authors were more likely to have a female colleague listed as the first author of their research (29/97 [29.9%] vs 155/1231 [12.6%]; χ2 = 22.561, p = 0.001). Conclusions Although this work showed an encouraging increase in the number of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research, the stagnant trend in Europe may suggest that a glass ceiling has been reached and further advances in equity would require more aggressive measures. The differences in the researchers’ profiles (academic title and affiliation) suggest an even wider gender gap. Cultural unconscious bias may explain why female senior authors have more than double the number of women serving as their junior authors compared with men. While changes in the workforce happen, strategies such as publishing specific issues on women, encouraging female editorials, and working toward more gender-balanced editorial boards may help our journals to portray a more equitable specialty that would not discourage bright female candidates. ©AANS 2021, except where prohibited by US copyright law
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Surgical Research: An Analysis of Authorship in Randomized Controlled Trials Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Becherucci, G.
    ;
    De Cassai, A.
    ;
    Capelli, G.
    ;
    Ferrari, S.
    ;
    Govoni, I.
    Introduction: Despite increasing female representation in medical fields, women remain underrepresented in high-impact authorship positions. This study examines gender disparities in authorship of randomized controlled trials in general surgery journals over the past 20 y. Methods: Utilizing PubMed and the Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023), we identified 8810 randomized controlled trials from 117 surgery journals, filtering down to 5694 studies for final analysis. Gender identification was performed using Genderize.io. Results: Results indicate that women accounted for 26.4% of first authorships and 18.7% of last authorships. Logistic regression revealed that a male last author significantly increases the likelihood of a male first author (odds ratio 2.68; 95% confidence interval 2.18-3.32). Over time, there is a positive trend in female authorship, with high correlation coefficients for both first (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.916, P < 0.005) and last (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.878, P < 0.005) authors. Interestingly, journal quartiles did not significantly influence the gender of first authors. Conclusions: These findings suggest persistent gender inequity in surgical research authorship, influenced by mentorship dynamics. The study underscores the need for strategies to enhance female representation in academic leadership to foster a more equitable scholarly environment. Limitations include reliance on Genderize.io for gender determination and the focus on general surgery journals, which may omit relevant studies from other domains. Overall, this research highlights incremental progress toward gender equality in surgical academia, advocating for continued efforts to close the gender gap. © 2024 The Author(s)
  • Item type:Publication,
    The Gender Gap in Surgical Literature: Are We Making Progress? Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Ajay, P.S.
    ;
    Sharperson, C.M.
    ;
    Shah, S.K.
    ;
    Kooby, D.A.
    ;
    Shah, M.M.
    Introduction: The percentage of women in surgical leadership roles is not commensurate with percent of women in field of surgery. Citation indexes are used as proxy for scholarly impact and may serve as an indicator of women's progress in academic surgery. We aimed to evaluate gender disparities in authorship of surgery manuscripts in high-impact journals. Methods: In this bibliometric analysis of original research articles from four high-impact surgical journals from 2008 to 2010 (period A) and 2018-2020 (period B), the gender of primary and senior authors was assigned by Genderize.io. Number of citations per article was identified via Web of Science. Number of citations by gender of authors was compared across time periods. Results: Of the 3575 articles (Period A = 1915; Period B = 1660), 962 (26.9%) had women as primary authors and 590 (17.2%) as senior authors. Over time, significant increases in women primary and senior authorship were noted from 22.8% to 31.7% (P < 0.001) and 13.9% (254/11,915) to 21% (336/1660), respectively (P < 0.001). Articles written with women primary authors had fewer median (interquartile range) citations than those by men as primary author in period A (39 [17-69.5] versus 42 [20.0-84.0]; P = 0.005). Gender parity was noted in period B (9 [4-19] versus 9 [4-20] citations; P = 0.307). In period A, articles written by women as both primary and senior authors had approximately 25% fewer median citations compared with those by men (34 [17-62] versus 44 [21-86]); P < 0.011), and this reached parity in period B (9 [4-20] versus 9 [4-21]); P < 0.658). Conclusions: Overall, gender authorship and citations parity are improving in high-impact surgery journals. © 2023 Elsevier Inc.